Drama in indy gaming and games journalism

[Fighter]

 

I'm sorry I don't understand what you mean, are these point what GG stands for or for what #stopgamergate2014 stands for

 

Because I want to know what GG stands for ?

 

Do you REALLY not understand what I just said? It's what GG stands for. The first part definitely. That's what nearly anyone would tell you, "this is about ethics". But obviously much of it has descended into a wider argument on gender politics and harassment.

[Enoch]

 

- Adopt/Clarify/Reinstate an ethics policy. Do so loudly in clear, plain, straightforward manner without any unnecessary ramblings about politics or internet toxicity.

This would be enough for me.

 

The problem with that statement is that the last part of it depends on what one means by "without any unnecessary ramblings."  It seems that many folks wouldn't be happy unless it really means "never call out ridiculous sexist trolls for being ridiculous sexist trolls."

 

 

If all you're concerned with is ethics in journalism, there is no need to associate with and provide ideological cover for the crowd of folks specifically objecting to those writers who have discussed games in the context of gender politics.  (And, also, where was all this rage back when it was just AAA developers shoveling money at the IGNs and Gamespots of the world?)

Edited October 15, 2014 by Enoch

[Fighter]

 

The problem with that statement is that the last part of it depends on what one means by "without any unnecessary ramblings."  It seems that many folks wouldn't be happy unless it really means "never call out ridiculous sexist trolls for being ridiculous sexist trolls."

 

 

No it just means a statement about basic ethics and sexist trolls are separate issues and injecting the latter into the former is deflecting and diluting the former issue.

Edited October 15, 2014 by Fighter

[Malcador]

(And, also, where was all this rage back when it was just AAA developers shoveling money at the IGNs and Gamespots of the world?)

AAA Companies aren't as easily trolled, and also don't make good victims.

[BruceVC]

 

 

 

So, using your own logic, it's okay to dox people, drive them from their home, and threaten to shoot up schools all in the name of "looking for corruption"?

 

 

I mean, you cast a pretty wide net with your words.

 

My entire post (not just the tiny slip you quoted) states that it mustn't severely infringe on privacy, and threatening to shoot up schools (and doxxing for that matter) has jack **** to do with looking for corruption. Honestly, I'm slightly offended by you drawing what I said so severely out of proportion. Using any logic at all and not just tying unrelated stuff together, what the hell does doxxing and deaththreats have to do with looking into available information and looking for corruption?

 

 

I think what he means is some people on GG claim there objective is tackle corruption but in fact  they aren't concerned about corruption at all and  have used the medium of GG to seriously harass people and basically engage in real bigotry and misogyny

 

 

Yeah well that has absolutely nothing to do with my post or his post for that matter, if that's what he means, maybe he shouldn't go off trying to shove crap down my throat or apply my logic in nonsensical manners. It doesn't matter whether that's how he feels, it doesn't excuse such extreme levels of strawmanning me.

 

 

The thing is he isn't really making a strawman

 

Remember you said GG is about looking for corruption, this is a noble and reasonable objective. So maybe that's what you really believe GG is about and I don't doubt the veracity of your belief

 

But GG has evolved for many of its members to something much more malicious and vindictive. So if someone says " GG is a good initiative because fighting corruption is good" its very easy to understand someone else saying " oh please with all the bigotry coming from GG how can you think that's what its really about  or that justifies the conduct of some GG members "

 

Anyway I'm not attacking you, I'm just explaining his perspective

[BruceVC]

 

 

I'm sorry I don't understand what you mean, are these point what GG stands for or for what #stopgamergate2014 stands for

 

Because I want to know what GG stands for ?

 

Do you REALLY not understand what I just said? It's what GG stands for. The first part definitely. That's what nearly anyone would tell you, "this is about ethics". But obviously much of it has descended into a wider argument on gender politics and harassment.

 

 

Okay thanks, I just wanted to be clear

[Enoch]

 

 

The problem with that statement is that the last part of it depends on what one means by "without any unnecessary ramblings."  It seems that many folks wouldn't be happy unless it really means "never call out ridiculous sexist trolls for being ridiculous sexist trolls."

 

 

No it just means a statement about basic ethics and sexist trolls are separate issues and injecting the latter into the former is deflecting and diluting the former issue.

 

Ah, but who is doing the "injecting" here?  When the whole thing starts out with a bout of ****-shaming a female game developer, maybe you've picked the wrong "movement" to support your journalistic ethics goals. 

 

It seems to me that you'd have better luck pushing for ethical standards in games journalism if you didn't associate with all those angry men's rights dip****s. 

[Malcador]

How exactly do you do that, though, just stop using a hashtag the moment some one says something 'offensive' ?

[Blarghagh]

And, also, where was all this rage back when it was just AAA developers shoveling money at the IGNs and Gamespots of the world?

 

I don't know, maybe ask Gamespot how the rage impacted them when they haven't been relevant for years and why Jeff Gerstwinn's Wikipedia page is the second hit when you google them. The difference here is that back then, it was a dog eat dog world and the other publications ate them alive just as much as the gamers did. Now the damn place has cliquefied and there's just a lot of handholding and covering for your friends. I've seen this argument made before but it just doesn't hold water. Significantly larger amount of gamers raged out far, far worse than this over a reviewer standing in front of some mountain dew and doritos product placement. But nobody attacked all gamers as being responsible for those ridiculous fringe morons and nobody claimed credibility due to victimhood over it.

[Fighter]

 

Ah, but who is doing the "injecting" here?

 

SJW dip****s. Hey, you went there.

[BruceVC]

 

And, also, where was all this rage back when it was just AAA developers shoveling money at the IGNs and Gamespots of the world?

 

I don't know, maybe ask Gamespot how the rage impacted them when they haven't been relevant for years and why Jeff Gerstwinn's Wikipedia page is the second hit when you google them. The difference here is that back then, it was a dog eat dog world and the other publications ate them alive just as much as the gamers did. Now the damn place has cliquefied and there's just a lot of handholding and covering for your friends. I've seen this argument made before but it just doesn't hold water. Significantly larger amount of gamers raged out far, far worse than this over a reviewer standing in front of some mountain dew and doritos product placement. But nobody attacked all gamers as being responsible for those ridiculous fringe morons and nobody claimed credibility due to victimhood over it.

 

 

Sorry TN but that's another fallacy about GG and its purpose and I know we don't agree on this one but it is important I raise this again

 

All "gamers " weren't attacked, only gamers who didn't believe in transformation, I can guarantee you  if you ask all the  people on these forums if they felt the various articles written were about every single gamer there will be several people who will disagree with you and say "no I didn't think that applied to me"

 

So its your own interpretation of the various events to say "all gamers were insulted and verbally attacked "

 

Looking back now I do think it was silly to use the word " gamers" because of all the consternation it caused but it still doesn't change the fact it was taken out of context and used by some as an excuse to push a certain agenda and gain support for that agenda

Edited October 15, 2014 by BruceVC

[Enoch]

How exactly do you do that, though, just stop using a hashtag the moment some one says something 'offensive' ?

I'm not much of an authority on hashtag ettiquete, but, yes?  When a conversation gets poisonous enough, you either drive out those making it so, or go find a different conversation. 

 

 

 

Ah, but who is doing the "injecting" here?

 

SJW dip****s. Hey, you went there.

 

Ah, so it's not about ethics after all.  Alright then. 

 

If calling men's rights creeps names is wrong, I don't want to be right. 

Edited October 15, 2014 by Enoch

[Fighter]

 

Ah, so it's not about ethics after all.  Alright then. 

 

I'm not sure why you think what you said merited a different response.

[Malcador]

I'm not much of an authority on hashtag ettiquete, but, yes?  When a conversation gets poisonous enough, you either drive out those making it so, or go find a different conversation.

Seems a bit silly though, acting as if you are guilty of someone else's deeds. Also makes it a joke for your opponents to control you as well, given it is Twitter based.

 

Good comedy at any rate

[Malcador]

Sorry TN but that's another fallacy about GG and its purpose and I know we don't agree on this one but it is important I raise this again

 

All "gamers " weren't attacked, only gamers who didn't believe in transformation, I can guarantee you  if you ask all the  people on these forums if they felt the various articles written were about every single gamer there will be several people who will disagree with you and say "no I didn't think that applied to me"

 

So its your own interpretation of the various events to say "all gamers were insulted and verbally attacked "

 

Looking back now I do think it was silly to use the word " gamers" because of all the consternation it caused but it still doesn't change the fact it was taken out of context and used by some as an excuse to push a certain agenda and gain support for that agenda

Believe in transformation ? What new buzzphrase faith is this ?

 

It was silly for Alexander to use it, because it isn't what she meant in her whiny diatribe, not to people taking her words to push an agenda.

[BruceVC]

 

Sorry TN but that's another fallacy about GG and its purpose and I know we don't agree on this one but it is important I raise this again

 

All "gamers " weren't attacked, only gamers who didn't believe in transformation, I can guarantee you  if you ask all the  people on these forums if they felt the various articles written were about every single gamer there will be several people who will disagree with you and say "no I didn't think that applied to me"

 

So its your own interpretation of the various events to say "all gamers were insulted and verbally attacked "

 

Looking back now I do think it was silly to use the word " gamers" because of all the consternation it caused but it still doesn't change the fact it was taken out of context and used by some as an excuse to push a certain agenda and gain support for that agenda

Believe in transformation ? What new buzzphrase faith is this ?

 

It was silly for Alexander to use it, because it isn't what she meant in her whiny diatribe, not to people taking her words to push an agenda.

 

 

I'm not sure I get what you mean?

 

If someone writes a scathing review on white, racist gamers and is really direct it wouldn't bother me because I'm a white gamer. I'm not a white, racist gamer

 

But can you explain what you mean about the agenda part of your post ?

[Malcador]

We've already been over this, before.

 

She didn't restrict her terms though, trying to be so hard sounding in the article for that I suppose. You are the one that said her words were taken to use an agenda, I have to explain your post to you ?

[Meshugger]

 

But of course GG has raised some valid concerns

Like what? 

 

I mean, apart from "some person I've barely heard of said or did something dishonest or mean." 

 

 

Let me steal 91 seconds of your time:

 

 

It is *grab-popcorn*-interesting because these journalists are so unapologeticly stupid when they can only spew vitrol like how gamers are like the KKK, worse than ISIS, misogynists and any other pathetic insult that you can find. It's like they swallowed Jack Thompson's message and repackaged it as social justice.

[Volourn]

"Women are treated bad in general, they earn less than men, and get worse treatment than men."

 

But, that's not mdoerate. It's patently untrue in so many ways. It's a myth spammed by liars taken as gospel but repeatedly proven false with facts.

 

 

 

"o the reason GG needs to shutdown is its utterly tainted. Its not going to achieve anything because of the extremist element that has hijacked its motives. Close it down and start some kind of group that can be regulated and raise the valid issues that you guys feel need to be raised"

 

Sound slike feminism which is tainted., feminism hates men AND women. Feminists and SJWs believe that white males are just rapists exist pigs. They want all men killed. Yup, tainted. pergaps, feminism should be closed and start some kind of group that is more reaosnable. I know. I'll call it Equalism.

 

So, Bruce, why do you support a group like femnism that wants all men to have their balls cu off, set on fire, and then murdered? Or a group such as feminism that believes women are weak and pathetic and should be treated like little children? Why do you support such a heinous extremist group?

 

 

"That and, well, people bashed a woman and that's always misogyny."

 

That's the key. It's okay to bash amman but fon't be negative towards a woman. Why? Because, feminists like Bruce believe women are weak and fragile and need to be protected at all costs and women are inherently more valuable than men as men are nothing but fodder for war and cattle for more kiddies and banks for more money. Men aren't even human. Theya re monsters who must be kept away from children AT ALL COST.

 

 

"All "gamers " weren't attacked"

 

Yes, they were. they called gamers white male sexist racist pigs. They claimed 'gamers were dead'. GUESS WHAT? I'M STILL ALIVE. You lose yet again, feminist nazis. Talk about death threats.

 

 

Equalism > Feminism

 

 

GAME OVER, MAN, GAME OVER.

[BruceVC]

We've already been over this, before.

 

She didn't restrict her terms though, trying to be so hard sounding in the article for that I suppose. You are the one that said her words were taken to use an agenda, I have to explain your post to you ?

 

No matter about going over something we have discussed before, we repeat things regularly on these forums

 

My point around the agenda was more how people after reading  that article then said " you see, this just highlights the absolute disdain gaming journalists have for us the gamers . We need to unite about this unacceptable behaviour ", and that was another reason for the success and foundation of GG

 

But once again if the article was misinterpreted it makes another reason for the creation of GG moot? Now I'm not saying the article was reasonable, I can understand how it must have annoyed people but its not a reason to now say " gaming journalists have no respect for gamers "

[Malcador]

No matter about going over something we have discussed before, we repeat things regularly on these forums

 

My point around the agenda was more how people after reading  that article then said " you see, this just highlights the absolute disdain gaming journalists have for us the gamers . We need to unite about this unacceptable behaviour ", and that was another reason for the success and foundation of GG

 

But once again if the article was misinterpreted it makes another reason for the creation of GG moot? Now I'm not saying the article was reasonable, I can understand how it must have annoyed people but its not a reason to now say " gaming journalists have no respect for gamers "

To be fair, a lot of these 'journalists' don't. Alexander must have been beat up by some nerds or something, but aside from her they all seem to think themselves greater than they actually are. I'm not certain the whole glut of 'Gamers are dead' articles that launched around the same time were all misinterpreted either as a result of watching these people at play. I think GG was before that article, back when it was still hunting down corruption or whatever, but I may be mistaken.

[kirottu]

Edited October 15, 2014 by kirottu

[BruceVC]

 

No matter about going over something we have discussed before, we repeat things regularly on these forums

 

My point around the agenda was more how people after reading  that article then said " you see, this just highlights the absolute disdain gaming journalists have for us the gamers . We need to unite about this unacceptable behaviour ", and that was another reason for the success and foundation of GG

 

But once again if the article was misinterpreted it makes another reason for the creation of GG moot? Now I'm not saying the article was reasonable, I can understand how it must have annoyed people but its not a reason to now say " gaming journalists have no respect for gamers "

To be fair, a lot of these 'journalists' don't. Alexander must have been beat up by some nerds or something, but aside from her they all seem to think themselves greater than they actually are. I'm not certain the whole glut of 'Gamers are dead' articles that launched around the same time were all misinterpreted either as a result of watching these people at play. I think GG was before that article, back when it was still hunting down corruption or whatever, but I may be mistaken.

 

 

Fair enough, maybe some gaming journalists don't respect the people who ultimately give them a job and pay there salaries. I would just find it a strange business model if that was really common. It would be like me having a company that sells ice-cream and then making a statement on TV that "people who eat ice-cream are fat lazy degenerates "

 

I can't imagine I'll be in business very long

[Malcador]

Well, they're banking on people like you to keep sustaining them, I suppose.

[Meshugger]